Israel cheers as Obama retreats before Congress on Iran deal

Israel said it is pleased with a compromise bill being floated on the Hill, which would give US legislators oversight in the Iran nuclear deal. The White House agreed to the bill adopted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"We are certainly
happy this morning, this is an achievement for Israeli policy...
[Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's] speech in Congress ... was
decisive in achieving this law, which is a very important element
in preventing a bad deal, or at least, in improving the agreement
and making it more reasonable," Yuval Steinitz, Netanyahu’s
intelligence, foreign relations and strategic minister, told
Israel Radio.

Israel has been opposing US reengagement with Iran, claiming the
result of the nuclear negotiations would be a bad deal that would
compromise Israel’s national security. Netanyahu made his case in
the US through pro-Israeli legislators, who are opposed to US
President Barack Obama.

“What was achieved last night in Geneva is not a historic
agreement, but a historic mistake,” said Netanyahu, after a
preliminary deal paving the way for negotiations was reached in
2013.

Under the 2010 “Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and
Divestment Act,” the president can waive sanctions imposed by
Congress for a limited time, as a policy measure. However,
Senate Bill 615 would remove that option and
insist on congressional review of the final nuclear agreement
with Iran before any of those sanctions could be waived.

Proposed by Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Democrat Robert
Menendez (D-NJ), the “Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015”
envisions a 52-day review period during which the president
“may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or
otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with
respect to Iran under any provision of law.” The White House
can still suspend, waive or remove sanctions imposed by executive
order.

If the bill is adopted, then Congress would be able to reject the
nuclear agreement with Iran through a joint resolution,
preventing Obama from lifting any congressional sanctions and
possibly scuppering the treaty.

Iranian officials have said that the preliminary agreement
reached in Geneva earlier this month would see most
nuclear-related sanctions lifted immediately, while US officials
maintain the sanctions would be lifted in phases, depending on
Tehran’s compliance. This is one of the issues that still needs
to be resolved before the June deadline for the final agreement.

“We have two and a half months more to negotiate, that's a
serious amount of time with some serious business left to
do,” Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters Monday,
after meeting with the legislators behind closed doors. “We
hope Congress listens carefully and asks the questions that it
wants. But also give us the space and the time to be able to
complete a very difficult task which has high stakes for our
country.”

Under the amended text of the bill agreed in committee, Obama
would also have to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran
was complying with the final agreement, and submit detailed
reports on Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missile program, and
“support for terrorism,” all of which remain thorny issues
between Washington and Tehran.

Announcing the preliminary agreement on April 2, Obama said he
wanted Congress to play a “constructive oversight role”
in the negotiating process. However, the White House has argued
that making international agreements is a constitutional
prerogative of the executive branch, and that congressional
oversight of the Iran deal would set a dangerous precedent. It
now appears that Corker-Menendez has enough support from the
congressional Democrats to override the veto Obama has been
threatening, a senior Democratic aide told the New York Times.

.@PressSec says
Obama was prepared to veto the Corker bill, now looks like "the
kind of compromise the president would be willing to sign"

Amendments proposed by several Republican Senators, including
presidential hopeful Marco Rubio, could erode the bipartisan
support. There were several amendments that would “pull this
bill sharply to the right if adopted,” Senator Chris Coons
(D-Del) told reporters Tuesday.

With Republicans making up the majority of the Foreign Relations
Committee, these amendments could be adopted through a party-line
vote. If that happens, Coons cautioned, “I’d drop off of it
in a second.”